I’m asking this question because I used to frequently browse RationalWiki, (A Neoliberal Skeptic website that frequently calls ML’s debunkings of Atrocity Propaganda “denialism” and “apologia”, and conflates said debunkings with Holocaust denial), and would like some clarification on this point.
Truth?
There’s really no difference between Holocaust denial and “holodomor” denial except that one of those things is correct and the other isn’t. Holocaust denial isn’t bad because you’re denying a genocide, it’s bad because you’re denying a genocide that happened and for which there is overwhelming evidence.
If it were wrong to deny any genocide claim, then the perfect attack to make against any political opponent would be an accusation of genocide. You could accuse literally anyone of genocide at any time and if they deny it suddenly they’re the same as a Holocaust denier. Obviously that’s absurd and invalid.
It’s bad because it’s also just used as a “thought-terminating cliché” and a form of strict censorship. I get hit off Reddit for questioning the Holodomor.